The total direct costs of the Fukushima Daiichi catastrophe for TEPCO, including compensation and clean up, are estimated at over $100bn. Many Japanese, however, experience in their daily lives that the damages are considerably higher because most of their claims and losses go uncompensated and most of their suffering goes unrecognised.

The nationalisation of TEPCO, together with a legal practice called “channelling of liability” in which all liability related to the Fukushima nuclear disaster has to be channelled to TEPCO, means Japanese taxpayers and ratepayers will foot most of the bill.

GE, together with its corporate mates from Hitachi, which is responsible for the construction of Fukushima Daiichi Unit 4, and Toshiba, which delivered Reactor No. 3, as well as Ebasco, Kajima, Areva and many others, have mostly kept mum about their involvement.

The Prime Minister orders venting

Prime Minister Naoto Kan had to order venting the day after the disaster. Without venting the containment might have given way to the rising pressure, which is a problem identified 30 years ago by several GE whistleblowers. It was not easy to give the order. Workers would risk potentially lethal doses of radiation and the evacuation around Fukushima had not even started. Venting would expose thousands of people to radiation, but the alternative of an exploding reactor would create even more havoc. TEPCO, GE, Hitachi, and Toshiba knew that this could happen. Not one of them ever demanded the closure of the reactors. Closing their eyes to their obviously faulty product, they spread the impression that people were safe.

Socialising risks, privatising profits

TEPCO is different than Chernobyl where the state owned and operated the reactor. A private enterprise developed the Fukushima Daiichi’s Mark 1 reactors and GE, Hitachi, Toshiba and other companies made huge profits building and servicing the power station. If this were a car, these companies would recall all their nuclear reactors and compensate customers for the costs and losses incurred.

But this is not a car. This is the nuclear industry and these companies continue as if nothing has happened to them. They are saved by TEPCO’s bankruptcy and nationalisation, and they are saved by the unique liability regime surrounding the nuclear industry where profits are privatised but accident liabilities are socialised.

It is clear why we don't see GE, Hitachi and Toshiba rush to put hundreds of millions of dollars into the Fukushima compensation fund. If they did, they would be admitting some kind of guilt and could open up an avenue for making compensation claims against them. Their share prices would plummet and it would force them to rethink their involvement in the nuclear sector. And who wants that?

Well, I want it.

I think that what we see now is an utter shame and outrage. Elsewhere, Hitachi and GE are trying to convince the Lithuanian government to pump almost $9bn into a new nuclear reactor, and accept a liability regime that is capped at $160m. Toshiba, with its sub-group Westinghouse, is wooing Czech CEZ to buy two reactors with the cap on liability in the Czech Republic at $450m. Hitachi is also actively lobbying Turkey with a cap of $24m, and Vietnam with a $230m cap to buy one of its reactors.

At the same time, I hear of people struggling to make ends meet after they fled the Fukushima region, of suicides because the hardships are too much to bear, of families split apart because they do not dare let their children grow up in the contaminated areas even though the father's work is still there, and of companies gone bankrupt because their resources are suddenly taken off the market due to contamination.

First, all victims need to get the compensation they deserve. The nationalisation of TEPCO is a step that could improve the situation. But this should not mean that those who profited from the risk that Fukushima Daiichi clearly posed and those that are profiting from all the other uncovered risks from nuclear power in the rest of the world should escape their responsibility. Facing this responsibility in terms of cold hard cash could help prevent a disaster like this happening again.

Jan Haverkamp is nuclear energy and energy policy specialist for Greenpeace and professional group facilitator.

His previous work as energy campaigner and developer of environmental organisations in Central Europe brought him into contact with nuclear power and energy policy in countries across the globe. He also worked for four years as Greenpeace's EU nuclear policy advisor in Brussels. He teaches 'facilitation of environmental communication processes' and 'the role of environmental NGOs in society' at the Masaryk University in Brno, Czech Republic. His academic background is in biochemistry, nuclear physics, environmental sciences and social and communication psychology. He has two children and lives in Gdansk, Poland.

According to several news sources (for example NHK) Osaka major Hashimoto has proposed the Japanese government to restart the Ohi reactors temporarily...

According to several news sources (for example NHK) Osaka major Hashimoto has proposed the Japanese government to restart the Ohi reactors temporarily during this year summer, in order to be able to supply electricity during the peak hours.
The official speaker for the government, mr. Fujimura, rejected the proposal saying that it does not even cross his mind (臨時的な運転再開“念頭にない”) to do so.

This kind of annoyed reply confirms that being able to supply electricity during the peak hours in summer is not the reason the Japanese government and the electric utilities want to restart their nuclear reactors, it is just propaganda.

I am grateful to mr. Fujimura for speaking his mind so clearly; I hope the Japanese people will take note and cast their vote appropriately when the time will come.

Thank you for this eye opening article. It does not surprise me about GE and the other companies hiding from their mistakes. What does astonish me is ...

Thank you for this eye opening article. It does not surprise me about GE and the other companies hiding from their mistakes. What does astonish me is that they are trying to sell their product an "knowledge" to other countries. Keep up the great work.

Concerning manufacturers liability, if I recall correctly, a few countries (USA, Japan, Mexico, Hungary) entered a treaty whereby in case of accident the manufacturer is not liable at all, only the operator of the reactor is.

Obviously this is not motivating manufacturers at working hard to make sure their plants are safe. On the contrary, it externalizes the costs of nuclear power to the taxpayer, as it is happening in Japan.

Nuclear industry does not need any further incentive at doing a sloppy job. For example, the idea itself of "venting" the GE Mark I shows how cheap its design is: if pressure goes up too much you open the containment to the external environment. What "containment" is this? It is like buying a gas mask that does not allow you to breath properly when you run, so it has a hole that you can open in case of emergency!

Some knowledgeable folks reading this blog might say that you can install filters on the venting pipe, however in reality at Fukushima there were no filters (cost cutting). Along the same lines Fukushima Daiichi did not have any hydrogen filters to prevent explosions, did not have waterproof pumps to cool the reactors, did not have waterproof eletric lines nor waterproof emergency generators. The list of safety devices that were not installed or did not work at Fukushima is too excruciatingly long to be repeated in full here.

Manufacturers and operators of nuclear plants need to bear the full financial and criminal responsibility for their mistakes; governments should not give them any discount.

I think this was almost equivalent to a natural disaster and was really horrifying for every nation. But, the way Japan came out and controlled the si...

I think this was almost equivalent to a natural disaster and was really horrifying for every nation. But, the way Japan came out and controlled the situation was commentable. In fact, the ways government adopted to help the employees are really a source of inspiration for the entire universe.
I read a blog(http://www.personalinjuryclaimsspecialists.co.uk/accident-at-work-and-industrial-disease/) about solicitors willingly helping the victims free of cost fighting for the compensation.